Wednesday, October 25, 2017

Civic nationalism is implicit white nationalism

In 2014, the GSS asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that "I feel more like a citizen of the world than of any country". The following graph shows the percentages who "agree" or "agree strongly", by race and also by whether or not they were born in the US (N = 1,235). "Neither agree nor disagree", which made up a little less than 1-in-5 of all responses, are not included:


Keep in mind this was asked during Obama's presidency, when the sentiment of star outside linebacker Michelle was still ascendant. The non-white, non-native disparity is surely even wider today than it was just a few years ago.

Despite the best efforts of Ben Shapiro and Paul Joseph Watson, the outlook for civic nationalism is not good. Civic nationalism is implicit white middle American nationalism. The smaller the share of the total population white middle America constitutes, the weaker an already enfeebled civic nationalism becomes.

While it would break the hearts of Bret Stephens and David Brooks--is there an echo in here?--if they knew it, the GSS also shows that, far from being more enthusiastic Americans than actual Americans, immigrants are ho-hum about US citizenship. The following graph shows the percentages of people living in the US, by whether they were born in the country or outside of it, who "strongly agree" that they would "rather be a citizen of American than any other country in the world" (N = 3,788):


They are also ho-hum about the US, which is a big reason for the moribundity of civic nationalism.

We are headed for either political dissolution or the end of democracy and the beginning of an imperial occupation within the boundaries of the US itself. Jack Donovan has said a few words regarding the latter.

GSS variables used: CITWORLD(4-5), RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), AMCITIZN(1), BORN

39 comments:

IHTG said...

What if I told you implicit white nationalism is the only white nationalism

Audacious Epigone said...

I'd say it's an assertion that is hard to argue against.

dc.sunsets said...

Does it not seem like everyone else thinks there's somewhere for them to go if things get bad (somehow) in the USA?

Whites in the USA know this is "it." We lose here, we lose period. That sentiment is the "Idea Whose Time Has Come," and only the dead-ender Left fails to grasp the sine wave lesson.

This is why I still believe (hope?) that when the Gravy Train of unlimited debt issuance ends, they will all go home. The black underclass will riot, of course, but unlike in the 1960's there will be no burgeoning belief in unlimited resources to fuel support for rewarding extortion. The 13% of the USA that is black may undergo a spontaneous revision toward single digits if riots are met with "Go ahead, destroy yourselves" attitudes. We're halfway there with the growing sentiment of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

I see the collective insanity of Leftist Equalism as nothing more than a long-lived fad, fueled by the same magical beliefs that animate trust in the future cash flows promised by the Bond Ocean. While there is no firm answer to the question, "How high is up?" we still know that at some point the collective rationalizations for such things do finally break down. How much do we hear these days about Peak Oil now that Light Crude is $50-something a barrel?

The collective rationalizations for today's latest outrage-against-nature seem stretched to the limit. Experience in commodity markets informs us that such conditions are not in themselves sufficient to forecast an imminent reversal, but they sure as hell tell us that trees still don't grow to the sky.

I will admit to impatience. As in 1999 and early 2000 when nothing more than a four-letter stock symbol meant "rocket ride higher in share price," nothing but frustration accrued to rational analysis. But experience has taught me that while my timing will be off by a mile, the denouement of each trend still eventually obeys some semblance of reason.

DissidentRight said...

1. Good, then they won't mind being deported.

2. The problem with the term "white nationalism" is that Yankees ≠ Southeners ≠ Midwesterners, and the former nation happily conquered the latter. While we all have a lot more in common than the elements of the EU, particularly thanks to 100+ years of Yankee Reeducation, it's not enough to convert "they hate us because we're white" into something lasting.

This is why I still believe (hope?) that when the Gravy Train of unlimited debt issuance ends, they will all go home

1. One concern is that their home countries (with a few exceptions) are crap, too. The Big Crash has to be big enough to make their lives here comparatively worse off, and to me that seems a implausible.
2. The xenos will be able to make the downward adjustment, in particular towards a lack of security, much more easily than an awful lot of city & suburban whites.
3. Depending on the size of the Crash, there will still be plenty of cuckservatives (millenials and Gen X certainly) around to mobilize local xeno-aid efforts out of sheer, indefatigable True Belief. Note that cuckservatives are more far more likely to be self-sustaining than, say, SJWs. And True Cuckservatism is a gradient; for every "I must invite xenos into my neighborhood b/c they're suffering", there could be 2 or 3 who simply say, "I'll be damned if I sit back as those 'Nazis' try relocate people on my watch."
4. I think a lot these factors will dampen the "let's just go home" impulse.

dc.sunsets said...

DR, I think the rage among Americans will provide "additional impetus." (wink)

We're coming off Peak Trust. We're headed to Peak Distrust. Cuckservatism won't survive five seconds under the latter's conditions, and when people are fearful and distrusting, and conditions mirror those of the English Civil War, I'm not sure how long "bleeding hearts" of any kind will last except in the absolute literal sense.

As for the turd world invaders, the devil they know at home will still be better than trying to eke out existence where the evil eye while at a store is the least of their worries.

Just conjecture, though. The future is always a surprise.

DissidentRight said...

Yeah, that makes sense. It'll be interesting to see how these things unfold in different regions, though. For example, the "additional impetus" might not be felt very strongly in areas that are already very heavily xeno-occupied (in fact my guess is that one of the immediate consequences will be any remaining whites fleeing those areas).

After that it's just a matter of time before the infrastructure (e.g., grocery stores) breaks down. For some of these larger brands, they might be willing to throw good money after bad (i.e., restocking a store that got mobbed & robbed) for quite a while, if only to avoid accusations of racism. But you'll see men with machine guns patrolling WalMarts as surely as there will be reports of the Army drone-striking American cities.

Peak Distrust. Cuckservatism won't survive five seconds under the latter's conditions

I know some cuckservatives who make me question that assumption. These are not faggy virtue-signaling types, but True Believers, who as far as I know have accepted the old demographic trendline and consider it a cross they will have to bear, like the Church under Diocletian. I don't know what they'll do when push comes to shove, especially since there will be a powerful and persuasive nationalist movement by that time. But I observe that leadership has never been a cuckservative trait.

It's like, I think I saw a 4 on one of those die faces. But I have no idea how many faces the die has, or what the distribution of values is. Surprise indeed.

Audacious Epigone said...

Does it not seem like everyone else thinks there's somewhere for them to go if things get bad (somehow) in the USA?

The 1%ers have pegged New Zealand. For the rest, this is home. Hell, is South Africa is still home to the remaining whites, there's ton of ruin left yet before middle American whites decide this is no longer home!

Audacious Epigone said...

One concern is that their home countries (with a few exceptions) are crap, too. The Big Crash has to be big enough to make their lives here comparatively worse off, and to me that seems a implausible

That is in large part contingent upon what life is like here. If existing illegally becomes a big hassle, the economic disparity need not close that much to have a significant impact. Hell, it doesn't necessarily need to close at all.

DissidentRight said...

If existing illegally becomes a big hassle, the economic disparity need not close that much

Right, but somebody has got to make it a hassle.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

I am personally skeptical that there will be a big crash or an instant moment where we all know how screwed we are. Instead it is a long and slow decline. You could argue we've been on a decline since the late 90s, the last time when a middle class family felt viable. Probably the last time you really could pay for college tuition with an internship. Probably the last time a starter home was under a million dollars in the most expensive places to live in the country.

It'll be slow but sure. You have less money, things cost more, and you don't know who your neighbors are. You make sure all your doors are locked but if someone breaks into your car, just sigh and fill out the police report; you'll get insurance money but the police won't even bother to find the suspect. Pretty soon you can't go to places you used to go anymore without getting harassed by the new population. You will struggle to make ends meet, work harder, and get told that the promotion you deserve is given to a minority to meet their quotas to keep getting government contracts that your business depends on to stay open. It is seemingly tougher and tougher to start a family and the school you and your wife grew up in are now dangerous and private school is $10,000 a year. "Better wait until we get some money saved up" you figure and put off having children until your mid-30s where you'll have one child with a difficult birth versus your mid-20s where you could have 2-3 normal, healthy births. Good luck saving for retirement either!

Then any media you consume tells you how you are consigned to the dustbin of history and that your job is to atone for dead relatives and that despite putting in 60 hours in the office that week, you have it too good. Then when your own people defend yourselves, it is nonstop screeching from this new population, who act as red guards and shock troops from elites who may not even live in your country. Roll over and just die.

The Big Decline is already happening and people are going to react accordingly. Trump or his platform would have never been considered until now. Even in 2012. It took white people 15 years to start waking up. It was never going to be fast or easy but it is happening. It is our job to make sure that white people stay awake instead of going to back to sleep with professional sports, cheap debt, and instant gratification.

DissidentRight said...

It is our job to make sure that white people stay awake instead of going to back to sleep with professional sports, cheap debt, and instant gratification.

Technically that's a job only SJWs and xenos can do.

We're just hear to stand firm, speak the truth, and collect as many survivors as we can.

Audacious Epigone said...

DissidentRight,

Yes, somebody does.

Random Dude,

Agree with the steady decline. This video is brilliant in conveying as much.

I do suspect it more likely than not that there will be a definitive precipitating 'crisis' that precedes official political dissolution though, and the most probable candidate is a severe economic downturn.

The Big Decline is already happening and people are going to react accordingly. Trump or his platform would have never been considered until now

This is an extremely important observation. Pat Buchanan had more gravitas and class than Trump, and he managed to win a single state while Trump won the presidency. That the GOPe was so overwhelmingly disgusted by Trump revealed just how sudden the turn has been. They would've been more nuanced in their opposition and undercutting if they'd genuinely thought he was a threat. They didn't because they couldn't believe there had been such a shift in just four years.

Over the summer when I had the opportunity to talk to Jared Taylor, he expressed for the first 20 years of AmRen, he figured his efforts would at least leave a record for posterity that not all whites were self-destructively suicidal. He'd at least show that there was an opposition, however weak, to the madness.

Nothing has made his heart gladder than the last couple of years. He still thinks it's an uphill battle, but for the first time since he's been doing this--and he's been at it for a long time--he thinks we have a shot. I'll never forget it.

Our job is an important one indeed.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Nation and race are interchangeable. There is no real difference. The non-Whites are not here for citizenship. They came to eat and consume what Whites have built. That pinhead Obama sank the Goodwill Gravy Train. That uppity little twerp and his unmistakable HATRED of Whites has doomed his inferior race to extinction. Even now China is moving into black areas in Africa. I have a feeling that instead of obumbacare, they will use The Tienanmen Square Plan.
The collapse has already happened. Every state is NOW BROKE. The Federal Goobermint is trying desperately to make January 1st when a MASSIVE TAX INCREASE disguised as a "Obamacare" rate increase is about to crush the last of the optimism. This Failed State is FALLING DOWN. The rats are already bailing out. That Stock Bubble keeps getting pumped. Its gonna POP.

Sid said...

Random Dude and AE are on the mark with the Big Decline and shifting social attitudes.

I will add that the ultimate disappointment of the Obama presidency has had a lot to do with today's shifting zeitgeist. Quaint as it is to think now, there was an almost Messianic expectation nine or ten years ago that Obama's rise would dissipate America's racial divides and inequities, and would finally inaugurate the long desired post-racial* age of American history. A vote for Obama was purification for whites in particular of their racist history.

But that age never came about. While Obama's first three years were fairly sober and reasonable, American culture descended into lunacy starting in 2012. SJWs started to emerge and take grip of the megaphone, with the War on Women, Trayvon Martin incident, and fervor over gay marriage all being attempts to whip up the Fringes and get them to the polls.

Undergirding a lot of this sentiment, I believe, was an anxiety that Obama really wasn't having the transformative effect on race that many had expected from him. The rhetoric became more vitriolic, the venom against white men ever more acrid. If things weren't getting better, it was because of those white men holding Obama and the future back!

Of course, as the social justice bile grew worse, the alt right began to emerge largely as a reaction to it. Whatever else can be said about the Obama administration, racial inequalities between blacks and whites didn't narrow much at all. In light of this, one can either believe in the social justice rhetoric more fanatically and harshly, or question whether the mainstream views on race are actually true.

One thing that stands out to me in HBD comments is how many neophytes there are. So many people only became aware of race realism only a few years ago. It's my intuition that 80% of the Charlottesville tiki torch marchers never imagined they would march for white identity before the Trayvon Martin incident.

Glen Filthie said...

You have to remember that all leftism is self defeating, and that markets always win. Leftists began their march through the institutions 50 years ago and now none of them work. The universities are intellectual wastelands or daycares. The NYT can't sell a subscription to save its life. Harvey Weinstein raped half of Hollywood and nobody cares. Leftist liberal hives are all failing - Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, etc. California threatens to secede and half the nation volunteers to help them pack their bags.

I think there's a light at the end of the tunnel. You deplorable, despicable dirt people voted for Trump despite massive smear and hoax campaigns. Swamp creatures everywhere are in full panic and the smart ones have left already. In Europe hard right political parties are picking up steam everyday. Everyone, even the lefties know the wheels are coming off.

I suppose the old nickel about "people will do the right thing once all the other options are exhausted" applies.

dc.sunsets said...

The Valley of Difficulty ahead is, at its heart, a resumption of Nature culling humanity. The top-line, most-obvious problem is Diversity, Inc mixing immiscible peoples together, creating a massive gradient between parasites and host.

The more-difficult and less-obvious problem is genetic impoverishment of "white" peoples, which was a feedback loop with the sentiment that drove Diversity, Inc.

My wife teaches 4th grade. Her experience stretches to the 1980's. Her classes are mostly white kids, and for the last 7-10 years the trend for students' classroom-suitability (kids who exhibit self-discipline, self-control, rein in their impulsiveness, can even so much as help themselves at the most rudimentary level) is in free fall.

I used to think this was due to forced integration of "Special Ed" kids (who are often profoundly cognitively impaired, and will never be able to live independently) but it is now beyond question that her job conditions have cratered due to behavioral aberrations that appear unconnected to cognitive ability alone. Kids who are otherwise semi-normal in innate ability are defiant, or do the equivalent of "sit and spin" all day long, and neither carrot nor stick seems capable of coaxing these simulacra-of-children to help themselves one iota.

So much for the myth of universal, innate childhood curiosity.

We all know of intellectually capable young people whose lack of self-control (impulse control) leaves them incapable of success in college or at work above a bare subsistence level. It is as though something in the water has made astonishing numbers of (white) people incapable of anything but vice. They smoke, game, fap and fuck their way through life at a degraded trailer-park level of existence, irrespective of their IQ or family background.

I suspect it is actually genetic. I think maladaptive behaviors are just as heritable as eye color, and that (given the majority of genes are expressed in the brain) what we're seeing is metaphorically like grossly deformed individuals reproduced at high rates, only the deformity is behavioral (and primarily characterized by little-to-no impulse control, which lines up perfectly with the Leftist penchant for "feelz-driven" behavior.) In this constellation, leftism really is a deleterious mutation in the brain, and in extreme cases leads nauseatingly to men who suck and swallow the loads of dozens of anonymous men in a bathhouse, or take their penises up the ass, or women who reject the core of what it means to be female in favor of mimicking what they believe are prototypical male behaviors. What could be better evidence of extreme leftism as a mutant brain than the prospect of a man, convinced of his female-ness despite having a perfectly normal male body, visiting Dr. Mengele to have his genitals cut off and a suture-filled Frankenstein's Monster caricature of female genitals grafted between his legs?

dc.sunsets said...

Mutations lead to more leftism, leads to more mutations...rinse-and-repeat until a population long ago crossed the Rubicon to a too-large majority of parasites living on the backs of the productive (and marching toward Rome by putting everything on the National Mastercard.)

My point: First to go must be the 52-card-shuffling of immiscible races/creeds/ethnicities and behaviors, but when this long, debt-fueled mania finally ends and we see a return to Lifeboat Ethics, kicking individuals into the cold (figuratively or literally) will eventually hinge on the question of, "Does this person contribute to my survival or are they just a parasite?" The fraction of people in the USA that now meet this standard is already small, and is shrinking rapidly.

North American stands in desperate need of a great culling, but not just of those who are genetically predisposed by ancestry to not "fit in and contribute" but also those whose lineage accumulated what amount to "lethal mutations" in behavior. If this sounds incredibly harsh, I wish it were not so...but it is the inescapable conclusion when faced with the fact that none of the Diversity Inc folly of the last 50 years (or 300) could have occurred without Anglo-Saxon consent. Our ancestors conquered a continent, and we, their village-idiot offspring, gave it away. Genetic mutation is a better fall-guy than is plain and widespread stupidity.

silly girl said...

off topic

I would love to see a post on whether people to admit to ever having smoked marijuana have also committed a crime. I am guessing never users have lower rates of offending.

It would further be interesting to know how many who formerly used or tried marijuana favor legalization as compared to current users.

Feryl said...

"I think there's a light at the end of the tunnel. You deplorable, despicable dirt people voted for Trump despite massive smear and hoax campaigns. Swamp creatures everywhere are in full panic and the smart ones have left already. In Europe hard right political parties are picking up steam everyday. Everyone, even the lefties know the wheels are coming off."

The SJWs/NWO/Western yuppie class is shitting it's pants over Slavic/Baltic whites having leaders who are still listening to the ancestral cries and warnings of long-dead heroic warriors. East Germany gave lots of shit to Merkel, all the more so because she is one of "them" (from ex-commie country). Eastern Europe is girding up for a centuries long battle with decadent Western white heathens and surly Muslims. From the ashes of WW2 arose a profound transformation in the Western white psyche, which became evident quickly and has gained momentum with every passing year.....Yet....Has our desire to reach some kind of absolution for the sins of the past and sins of our fathers hit an insurmountable wall? The (lower-class) descendants of Charlemagne and such, for whom the elite seethe contempt, must reckon with what the future possibly holds:

- Current elites start to defend natives

- Elites continue to bring in hordes of foreigners who besiege and overtake the natives, thereby effectively signaling the (cultural at the very least) end of the most powerful bastions of Western civilization. California went from being majority white in the late 1960's to majority non-white in the late 1990's. New Jersey went from being 3/4 white in 1990 to 58% white in 2012 (and that number probably lumps in certain brown people with whites). Being that the coasts are now so developed and expensive, we're now seeing various non-white groups establish greater and greater footholds in all kinds of places in the US. Washington state is also notable for it's "shrinking" white population (Well over 80% in 1990, now trending towards 70% and even lower), as is Rhode Island (if memory serves, now under 70% white). What're we gonna be left with, eventually? Maine, North Dakota, the UP of Michigan? When whites dip below, I dunno, 45% of the population, are we gonna finally be left alone? Will things become such a mess that elites decide to have priorities that don't involve flooding the country with as many foreigners as possible, and don't involve fomenting abuse of whites? When some white countries come to resemble South Africa or Brazil, will Western elites finally stop agitating non-whites against whites?

Part of the Trump/Brexit awakening is that so many whites in prole areas are seeing way more diversity than they ever bargained for. And many whites no doubt fear that the outsized and threatening cultural presence of blacks (who've not been demographically imposing in a long time, if ever) will soon be replicated by the growing population of historically small ethnic groups in America. Islam is the biggest threat, no doubt. Many white Americans would except a 50% Mexican country in exchange for every Muslim being driven out. Islam stinks, a phony religion that promotes ignorance and bloodshed.

- Elites try to pull the same old same old but proles rise up and overthrow the corrupt elite; due to the huge geographic/cultural/ethnic diversity in the US, this is probably more of a remote possibility for the US than it would be for Europe.

Feryl said...

For the generations born in the 90's and beyond, diversity just is. Silents and Boomers dreamed of it, X-ers and early Millennials were told to sit back and enjoy the beginning of the diversity (shit) show. We're now well into the demographic transformation, which has followed the cultural transformation of 1946-1980.

It's no longer theory, it's reality. And just as no one before WW2 could've possibly envisioned what Westerners would think after the war, so too can none of us foresee what current and future generations will be thinking after some future momentous event.

Remember: what the Western countries did after WW2 is virtually without precedent in the entirety of human history, and without modern communication and Talmudvision would likely have never happened. Nor would it have happened without the cooperation of the 2nd most spoiled generation in history (the G.I.s) and the most spoiled generations ever(the Silents and Boomers).

But this cycle, this phase, is just 70 years old, and showing definite signs of wear and tear. And virtually nobody born in the last 40-50 years has had any say in it, compared to how young Silents and Boomers became avid and important players in culture and politics, making distinct marks on our trajectory from the 50's-present day.

Said it before, say it again: X-ers and Millennials have had a (often uneasy) pupil-teacher relationship with older generations, and being that the youngest Boomers are now 52 years old, and not getting any younger, at some point the torch has to be passed. Marco Rubio, not my ideal spokesmen, tried to tap into this issue during his campaign, but for it to resonate we need more young people willing to "talk out of turn" amongst their elders(something that Silents and Boomers never were shy about).

Feryl said...

"I would love to see a post on whether people to admit to ever having smoked marijuana have also committed a crime. I am guessing never users have lower rates of offending."

I've lamented the GSS shortcomings here, before. EVIDU (the drug injector variable, I believe) is probably the best GSS variable related to drugs, but it's only been asked since 2000.HLTH5 (pot or cocaine) was asked in 1991 and 2004, so not too useful.

The GSS variables related to crime aren't much better. A lot good stuff related to violence was asked in the 80's and early 90's, then inexplicably disappeared in 1994 or '95 (stuff like, "have you even been beaten up"?)

Without the GSS, I suppose you'd have to look into studies regarding drugs. Anecdotally, sort of, people born in the later 50's and early 60's are a train wreck, on account of going to high school in the 70's when drug use was most fashionable. It would appear that youthful exposure to harmful behaviors is much tougher to recover from. Drug use was something a handful of bikers, middle-aged bohemians, and rich college kids did in the 60's, and even then it generally didn't go beyond pot, mushrooms, mescaline, LSD, and so forth. By the mid-70's, it was common knowledge that kids "started" with psychedelics and booze in middle school and frequently escalated to "hard"/"party" drugs like coke and speed by the time they were in college. Older Boomers either did these drugs at an older age or never did them at all, whereas later Boomers did them at a young age to disastrous effect, often burning through relationships and finances before they ever really got on their feet. Health-wise, one would have to assume that someone born in 1945 would be much less affected by thirty something coke sniffing in the late 70's(ala George. W. Bush) than a 1960 born teenager doing the same thing around that time. For the younger person, it does that much more damage to engage in a stupid behavior, seeing as how they didn't have decades of relative good health under their belt. Psychologically, late Boomers were hit by the early onset of substance dependence; again, a twenty year old smoking pot who then does coke at 30 is going to be in better shape than a someone who starts pot at 12 and then does coke at 20.

Feryl said...

The Youth Risk Survey might be of help. It started in the early 90's, so it covers X-ers and Millennials. X-ers were much more promiscuous and violent than Millennials, though it should be said that drug use among early 90's teenagers was actually quite low (a lot of cig smoking, though). Cig smoking was a key indicator of the "growing up too fast" generation, and it marks the generational change perfectly. Cig smoking was high among 1999 high schoolers (those born from about 1981-1984)), then begins to decline in 2000 (1982-1985). it declines further in 2001 (1983-1986). By the time you get to 2005 (1987-1990), smoking is non-existent.

While the Reagan era taboo about drugs eventually petered out (the 1979-1984 cohort appears to have dabbled heavily in drugs during the cultural sewer of the later 90's), other indicators of risky behavior heavily diminished in the late 90's-present day. Kids aren't having sex anymore, and the near weekly high school fist fights that were the norm even in white schools back in the 70's-90's aren't as prevalent anymore.

Feryl said...

https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/pdf/trends/2015_us_violenceschool_trend_yrbs.pdf

2013 and 2015 were the first years in which the number of kids in school fights fell into the single digits.

In terms of overall fights, 2013 and 2015 also show little activity, with fewer than 25% of surveyed kids in either year reporting that they were in a fight. And this follows the two previous recorded lows, 2009 and 2011.

Interestingly, kids reporting fear about going to school has changed little, suggesting that we change one series of problems for another. Older generations of teens knew that due to some simmering rivalry or perhaps, a misunderstanding or taunt escalating to hostility, they might end up in a fight but it didn't seem to drastically affect their confidence and security.

Even though violence has diminished, teens these days (as in the last 5-10 years) still report similar fear levels as past teens, perhaps because these days "fear" arises from an anxiety that eventually, some one might hurt me. It looks like at any given time and place, a certain number of people will be scared regardless of the circumstances. Older generations rolled with the punches, the newest generation is afraid of the bubble wrap finally being pulled off.

Audacious Epigone said...

Jonathan,

A propositional nation is not a nation at all. It's an empire, and it requires imperial means to be held together (for awhile before inevitably falling apart).

Sid,

I remember walking my dog the bitterly cold day of the inauguration in January 2009. I was listening to NPR's coverage of the event. Your "messianic" description is hardly hyperbolic.

Wrt the neophytes, I'm sure I've written this in other places before, but I was struck by how many of what I consider the intellectual godfathers of the alt/dissident right, like Steve Sailer and John Derbyshire, were names a lot of the people (the young ones) at AmRen had a vague recognition of at most.

Julian Langness was the youngest Obama delegate in 2008. He's the epitome of what you describe.

Glen,

Z-Man has a segment on the VA gubernatorial election that is coming up, with some donorist puppet Democrat on one side and the donorist puppet Ed Gillespie on the Republican side. Gillespie is a neocon hollow man who, as Z puts it, was "an open-borders fanatic until last week" but is now running ads on the scourge of MS-13 gangbangers and sanctuary cities, and he has a legitimate shot of winning.

When Jeff Flake threw the temper tantrum over Trump, it's remarkable how little public support he got from anyone in the GOP ranks, including the most traitorous of cucks. They see the way the wind is blowing and many are ready to start prostituting themselves out in the name of Trumpism.

dc.sunsets,

That meshes with a lot of the anecdotal stories I've heard, though it's not as though it's the libertine do-what-you-feel-like types are doing that much spawning. Among whites, it's still the religious, church-attending ones who do the most baby making. If it's not genetic, is it a consequence of constant screen time and expectation of constant, immediate stimulation?

Silly girl,

The ADD survey is another one that might be able to cross-reference those things, but as Feryl notes the GSS doesn't (unless we group marijuana with hard drugs like cocaine, but that's probably not what you're after).

Feryl,

For the generations born in the 90's and beyond, diversity just is. Silents and Boomers dreamed of it, X-ers and early Millennials were told to sit back and enjoy the beginning of the diversity (shit) show. We're now well into the demographic transformation, which has followed the cultural transformation of 1946-1980

Can't overstate how important this is. It's why Buckleyite conservatism is a dead letter for Gen Z. We are the new barbarians. There is little in the culture we want to conserve. We're generations into the Great Erasure and the march through the institutions. It's too late for standing athwart yelling "stop!" It's time to start figuratively--figuratively!--throwing people out of helicopters

Anonymous said...

Do you have an email address? I'm concerned about posting publicly, although I'm a great fan.

Congratulations on baby #3 by the way!

And feel free to delete this comment. I just would like a more private communication method than posting a comment.

Audacious Epigone said...

Anon,

The one I used to have tied to the blog went defunct. It was an "iwon" domain I'd had since I started back in 2005. I haven't gotten around to tying a new one to it. Do you have a twitter account? That's the PM system I use most.

Feryl said...

Yep, ideological "modern" conservatism and moralism is basically dead at this point, what with Trump (a "Rockefeller Republican") and most people born after the mid-70's not being as judgemental or self-righteous as older generations. Also, look at how the onus has shifted: People born in the 30's-60's emphasized individual opportunity and responsibility, those born in the 70's-2000's emphasize the collective good and community responsibility.

The Me Generation promoted a conservatism that at best, accounted for taking care of one's immediate family with the glib implication that if everyone took care of themselves and their immediately family, somehow that would benefit us all by not making any particular person a burden to others. Thus the emphasis on cutting taxes, strangling big government, dismissing all unions (even private prole ones) as annoying and unnecessary, and always saying that The Market (TM) holds the key to greatness. And if you couldn't make it in this environment, then well, tough shit, it's on you. As Agnostic would say, the lion's share of important Silent and Boomer conservatives aren't such, they're really libertarians with a decent dash of judgmental morality.

As is often the case, people rebel against their elders for promoting dated and toxic ideas.


And yes, it was easy for guys like Buckley to get caught in the weeds of ideology when, after all, they grew up in an America in which 80-90% of people born from 1926-1965 were white and spoke English. They didn't have a damn clue that feckless elites, hedonists, and traitors would let in so many undesirables, nor did they realize how social cohesion (and good faith debate) becomes impossible when over 1/5 of the population is foreign and a still greater number are 2nd generation descendants of immigrants who often grew up in or near ethnic enclaves that don't at all resemble 1950's Mayberry. Silents and most Boomers early experience with diversity was mostly limited to having FOB Italian, Jewish, or Irish parents or grandparents.

Demographics, not ideology, is destiny, but try telling that to the average white person in say, 1970.

Corvinus said...

Donovan made the claim that "the world is deserving of a reset button and it deserves to fail". The irony here is that assuming there is a reboot of the boot, he and Milo would be purged from the ranks of the Christian Alt Right, as homosexuality is debauchery personified. The return of patriarchy would mandate their removal from society. But, for now, they serve as useful idiots in promoting the narrative.

IHTG--"What if I told you implicit white nationalism is the only white nationalism."

How do you define "implicit white nationalism"? Furthermore, how are you able to prove it is the ONLY white nationalism? You are making a bold assertion here. I would like to see some meat on the bones.

DC--I think maladaptive behaviors are just as heritable as eye color, and that (given the majority of genes are expressed in the brain) what we're seeing is metaphorically like grossly deformed individuals reproduced at high rates.

It's biological and nature, each playing a critical role.

DC--DR, I think the rage among Americans will provide "additional impetus." (wink)

Assuming that this rage turns into a lust for bloodshed and gore. For this transformation to occur, our nation would have to endure a decade of 30% unemployment; rampant food shortages; a definitive loss of personal and collective freedom; and a highly organized effort by Alt Right Leaders to purge the institutions by root and branch by way of brute force. Oh, and the women of the Alt Right would have to stop working and start reproducing. Since I am in a charitable mood today, I give it a 1% chance of occurring, considering that you and your ilk are armchair warriors, and not foot soldiers.

Random--"It is our job to make sure that white people stay awake instead of going to back to sleep with professional sports, cheap debt, and instant gratification."

And what happens if white people make their own personal decisions that run counter to the values you are espousing? Are they "cucks" and "race traitors"?

AE--"The Big Decline is already happening and people are going to react accordingly. Trump or his platform would have never been considered until now."

Trump won because of historically weak GOP candidates, because of idiocy known as Shitlery, and because Sanders/Obama supporters stayed home. In a decade from now will we be able to definitively state that there was this "big decline" and there was a marked shift in this "awakening of whites". Right now, everything is mere speculation.

Centauri--"Nation and race are interchangeable. There is no real difference."

No, those terms are distinct.

Corvinus said...

And, of course, the "Days of Broken Arrows" comment from the link (CH) is actually an indictment on the PUA lifestyle. CH capitalizes on the notion that modern women are essentially scoundrels and therefore today’s “men” have carte blanche to take advantage of their alleged fall from grace. Hey, it’s NOT their fault women are sperm receptacles, so PUA’s have no obligation to, for a lack of a better term, “save” them. In fact, CH states to give them what they want. How convenient for CH and company to blame how traditional male-female roles have been subverted by liberals and SJW’s without consequences. What “advice” do they offer? Pump and dump. Marriage and children is for suckers. If and when this magical reboot happens, and patriarchy is restored, CH and Roosh and the entire lot of them would be shot on sight.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

Demographics, not ideology, is destiny, but try telling that to the average white person in say, 1970

Right. It's understandable for a boomer tradcon to have believed this, and maybe still cling to it as an act of faith.

For people like Ben Shapiro and Paul Joseph Watson--who are in their early/mid 30s--to maintain it, however, is ridiculous. They serve as counterproductive pressure release valves.

Corvinus,

You're conflating a lot here.

Jack Donovan's homosexuality is of no consequence to his readers. He correctly identifies the "flamboyant dishonor" aspect of homosexuality as being what makes it so repugnant to us. Milo runs with this, though he does so in a simultaneously self-deprecating and self-promoting way, and it's one of (many) reasons why opinions of him are mixed. My two cents: He's a court jester without much in the way of underlying ideas to take seriously. Donovan is a much more serious thinker.

Heartiste wants to have fun enjoying the decline. Life is about living. What he provides in his PUA is a powerful tool that can be used in the service of a lot of different things, one of which is locking down a devoted wife for those who are so inclined. He has fun with it at times, but he also has a deep reverence for the ideal (shorn of so many of its contemporary manifestations) because he understands that, ultimately, it's what works.

Feryl said...

"Trump won because of historically weak GOP candidates, because of idiocy known as Shitlery, and because Sanders/Obama supporters stayed home."

The GOP candidates were ideologically strong.....for 1995. The many crossover GOP voters and non-true con GOP voters have lost all interest in the ideology of the 80's and 90's. Agnostic has pointed out numerous times that no matter the charisma or integrity (or lack thereof) of a candidate, it's the relevance of their platform that is ultimately important, though granted, the 2016 cycle proved that we are entering an era when strength and promises of such has become important.

The MSM BTW often praised the 2016 GOP field, since the Beltway of course is mostly clueless about what prole Americans hunger for these days. The Beltway, esp. on the Right to the extent that any elites are actually on the Right these days, is just fine with 1990's ideology. They were caught totally unawares that only around 20-25% of the population still thinks it's 1993. Trump busted through a lot of GOP conventional wisdom on trade and foreign policy and he ended up being by far the most popular GOP candidate.

And yes, Hillary sucks, but let's not forget that Trump was hit by tons of attacks from the establishment/the media. Not since George Wallace in the 60's/early 70's has a credible candidate gotten so much shit. And also, we've hit a point of tension and division that in some ways more resembles the 1930's than it does the 1960's. This divide being what it is, a lot of people on the Left would've pulled the lever for Chairman Mao(D)rather than virtually anyone running for the GOP. Sanders and many others would've done better than Hillary (prob. enough to tip MI and PA to the Dems, but let's not get carried away like the dolts who said that Hillary would win Arizona), but winning the US presidency is an incredible accomplishment and let's leave it the sore loser Left to try and cheapen what he did.

Feryl said...

The Nazis had some gays in the high command. During periods of conflict between the reigning Leftists and the resurgent Right, some gays get bored of prissy and humorless Leftists, of whom many are women and feminists who annoy men, gay or otherwise.

It's a point Milo has made numerous times: the Left is stodgy and tired, the Right is rollicking and invigorated right now. Being in power for decades (as the Left has been) breeds a culture of adherence to what is now tradition, where people considered insufficiently reverent are cast out. Gays are not agents of stability or reverence, on the contrary being irrepressible goof balls; no wonder at least a few enjoy the idea of making the Left establishment squirm.

I saw a documentary on 80's pop music where some (straight) guys and women said that the culture of the later 70's was dreadfully dull and depressing, and one way to escape was to go to a gay club or dance club that attracted gays. The "gay" emphasis on energy and style was later co-opted by the mainstream in the 80's, even while the moral culture of the 80's became conservative.

Feryl said...

"For people like Ben Shapiro and Paul Joseph Watson--who are in their early/mid 30s--to maintain it, however, is ridiculous. They serve as counterproductive pressure release valves."

I think these guys are basically the boy band contingent of the Right. If they serve as a beginner's drink to people who aren't ready for hard liquor, then so be it. Also, Watson in particular goes for the low-hanging fruit of refugees/Islam, and modern PC can't even accept that. PC wants domesticated/house-broken cucks who are only permitted to make group-level derisive statements against whites and Christians.

Corvinus said...

“Jack Donovan's homosexuality is of no consequence to his readers. “

It is of tremendous importance to the Alt Right and neoreactionaries. Is not homosexuality an affront to natural law? Is not the gay lifestyle one of the fundamental tenets of Cultural Marxism? He engages in homoerotic conduct, yet denounces fagdom as a disease of modernity. This “inner urge” demonstrates moral degeneracy. Moreover, the Alt Right and neoreactionaries seek to reinstitute patriarchy and remove one of the pillars of Cultural Marxism--the homosexual lifestyle.
Donovan and Milo would be DOA.

“Heartiste wants to have fun enjoying the decline. Life is about living. What he provides in his PUA is a powerful tool that can be used in the service of a lot of different things, one of which is locking down a devoted wife for those who are so inclined. He has fun with it at times, but he also has a deep reverence for the ideal (shorn of so many of its contemporary manifestations) because he understands that, ultimately, it's what works.”

Technically speaking, all men and women who have had sex prior to marriage have contributed to our decline. The 1950’s was not this perfect place, this utopia where men were men and women served them. The consumerism of the decade promoted that value. In reality, through historical research and anecdotal evidence, home life was more egalitarian. And certainly sex was kept under wraps, hidden from plain view. But there was infidelity, homosexuality, and good old fashioned debauchery occurring in the suburbs. It just was not as heavily advertised as it is today. So blame the sexual revolution of the 1960’s which merely opened up to the world what everyone was privately thinking--men AND women want to get their groove on. That is liberty in the raw.

Sure, CH’s insight into some of women’s peculiar ways have garnered attention by men, who experienced it themselves firsthand but neglected to put it down with pen and paper or digital ink. But he also wildly trumps up a number of men’s alleged proclivities and women’s idiosyncrasies through this manufactured sexual-social hierarchy. CH assuredly does not have “deep reverence for the ideal” because his own behaviors run directly counter to it. Had he merely curbed his rutting instinct by saying no to sex on a first date with a woman early in his dating career, and instead channeled that carnal urge to traditional pursuits--after all, men are the superior sex--he would have broken some bitch and as a result have had a litter of white children. Instead, due of his inborn low time preference and highly sexually-charged mind, he has focused on procuring carnal pleasure at the expense of Western Civilization. Now that he and Roosh are hitting that proverbial wall, with their personal charms no longer potent and their appearance fading, they wisely chose to alter their ego and entertain the masses through another venue--neo-reactionary thought. It is a brilliant strategy, I must admit. But the immutable fact remains they have are charlatans and hypocrites.

Feryl said...

Centauri--"Nation and race are interchangeable. There is no real difference."

"No, those terms are distinct."

I would say that nations exist in spite of racial diversity, not because of it. The desire to have cheap labor in the sweaty South led to tons of blacks being imported into America and then reproducing. The further North and West states had abolitionists who thought that blacks needed to be uplifted, while Southern elites didn't want to be denied compliant labor that could tolerate mosquitos and humid heat. And thus would the conflict over who and what blacks are, and what they're capable of and what they deserve, rage for centuries to come. Blacks have sown more drama in this country than anything else. Didn't have to be this way. The North should've let the South secede; different cultures, different needs. And if that would've stopped blacks from moving to Northern cities in large numbers, than all the better.

The average American could be forgiven for thinking that America is 20-40% black, on account of how much they figure in our discourse and in our culture. Similar to how surveys taken in the last 20 or so years reveal that most Americans naively think that gays make up 10-20% of the population, when it's more like 2-4% of the population that's exclusively gay throughout most or all of their lives. Since the mid 90's, open gays have been permitted much more mainstream representation, thus causing estimates of their numbers to be inflated.

Feryl said...

Now that he and Roosh are hitting that proverbial wall, with their personal charms no longer potent and their appearance fading, they wisely chose to alter their ego and entertain the masses through another venue--neo-reactionary thought. It is a brilliant strategy, I must admit. But the immutable fact remains they have are charlatans and hypocrites.

50 is the magic number for men. For women, it's 35, give or take a year or two depending on obesity/smoking/tanning and the like.

A big reason so many of these old pervs are being exposed is because having a 60+ year old man acting like drunken frat boy is appalling to any woman, young or otherwise. After the age of 50, the only thing women will appreciate in a guy is money and security; she ain't getting the hots over the physical appeal of an old dude with gray pubes. Note that Obama and JFK got a lot of mileage out of their (relative) youth, and (non-balding) men don't tend to get too concerned about their looks until they're well into middle age.

The PUA lifestyle gimmick pioneers still have some gas left in the tank; it'll be interesting to see how they adjust (or don't) to entering older age when women will stop gazing at them, and ways to attract attention (like wearing a leather jacket, driving a sports car, wearing expensive jewelry, and the like) can come off as sad and desperate, not enticing.

Let's face it, it isn't just women who deal with a "wall"; players have them too. Thus, "dirty old man" and "mid-life" crisis are commonly heard insults whereas young guys are neutrally assumed to be randy and show-offey and nobody think anything of it.

BTW, semen quality does degrade in older men to some degree, so that's why there's a wall.

Audacious Epigone said...

Corvinus,

Tremendous importance?

It's notoriously difficult to pin down exactly what the alt right is, but I think Vox Day's 16 points is a pretty good place to start. Nothing about homosexuality in there at all. It's not much of a topic of discussion in the virtual places I frequent, either--I probably post about it more than anyone else.

Feryl,

Re: the boy bands, yes, they serve as a gateway by constantly staking out as far from the multicult consensus that it remains acceptable to be. It's why they police those on their right more relentlessly than they ever police those on their left. But they're useful in getting people out on the fringes, and they're unable to stop a lot of those people from stepping outside of civilization and into the true dissident darkness.

dc.sunsets said...

I find the conflation of "let everyone be happy" and the promotion of lifestyles that do not lead to happiness a fascinating paradox.

The Left's intolerance for intolerance (chuckle) ends up looking like behavioral aberration (AKA mental illness) writ large. The more US and Western culture has tacked left, the faster have appeared endless symptoms of individual misery. How can someone who favors acceptance of transsexuals match up the misery that follows those who go that route?

As for Cornvinus' claim that 1950's suburbia was a hotbed of Bacchanalian hedonism, where is her proof? Abortions? Out of Wedlock births? Data on epidemics of gonorrhea and syphilis? I'm not buying it. Give me the early 1960's any day of the week; it would be one heck of world to offer my grandkids.
-----------------
DC--DR, I think the rage among Americans will provide "additional impetus." (wink)

Assuming that this rage turns into a lust for bloodshed and gore. For this transformation to occur, our nation would have to endure a decade of 30% unemployment; rampant food shortages; a definitive loss of personal and collective freedom; and a highly organized effort by Alt Right Leaders to purge the institutions by root and branch by way of brute force. Oh, and the women of the Alt Right would have to stop working and start reproducing. Since I am in a charitable mood today, I give it a 1% chance of occurring, considering that you and your ilk are armchair warriors, and not foot soldiers.


Corvinus, you, like just about everyone else who expresses an opinion, seems to have very little grasp of just how unstable is the US' economy. Take a moment and try to imagine any decently-paid jobs that do not rely in large part, if not entirely, on government spending that is only enabled by borrowing on an unprecedented scale.

Yes, it's been exponentially rising for 36 years, so it looks permanent. But I ask you, am I so wrong to suggest that 8 of 10 decent jobs exists only because of the ability to borrow, which was an artifact of a 35 year, TYPICAL secular bull market for debt securities? If you think that tree can grow to the sky, be my guest. As I see it, however, when interest rates rise far enough in the evolving (perfectly normal) secular bear market for debt, it will choke off borrowing, destroy all those industries that grew up ONLY because of seemingly unlimited "wealth" from borrowing, destroying the TAXES PAID by all those job-holders, thus becoming a feedback loop of forced austerity, job losses, industry implosions and a Hobbesian State of Nature among the various political factions battling over the left-over scraps.

I have read your comments often and enjoy them as a perfect encapsulation of the USS Pollyanna who learned that sailing Lake Superior is easy when it is calm.

Sweetheart, there will be no organization necessary. The world ahead is just the the one now and the one behind, all of which are the product of spontaneous organisation. Didn't you learn anything at all from Victor Hugo? No army can resist an idea whose time has come.



Corvinus said...

Feryl...

"50 is the magic number for men. For women, it's 35, give or take a year or two depending on obesity/smoking/tanning and the like."

For both men and women, the magic number is when they regularly stop caring about what they look like and/or when mother nature creeps in. There is no set age here.

"The PUA lifestyle gimmick pioneers still have some gas left in the tank."

They are running on fumes. Exactly why a number of them turned to the Alt Right. It's about remaining relevant on the Interwebs.

AE...

"Tremendous importance?"

Refer to Pillar 4. Christianity abhors homosexuality. And for those on the Alt Right who wish to reinstall patriarchy and Christian values, homosexuality has no place.

dc...

"As for Cornvinus' claim that 1950's suburbia was a hotbed of Bacchanalian hedonism, where is her proof? Abortions? Out of Wedlock births? Data on epidemics of gonorrhea and syphilis? I'm not buying it."

His proof, ma'am.

http://history.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/liberal%2050s.pdf

Look up the Kinsey Report

"Corvinus, you, like just about everyone else who expresses an opinion, seems to have very little grasp of just how unstable is the US' economy."

I understand its fragility, but you overestimate its instability. Our economy is based on wants, ideas, and technology. Of course, the elites have in case of emergency break glass contingency plans.

"As I see it, however, when interest rates rise far enough in the evolving (perfectly normal) secular bear market for debt, it will choke off borrowing, destroy all those industries that grew up ONLY because of seemingly unlimited "wealth" from borrowing, destroying the TAXES PAID by all those job-holders, thus becoming a feedback loop of forced austerity, job losses, industry implosions and a Hobbesian State of Nature among the various political factions battling over the left-over scraps.

Maybe. Maybe not.